lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2010 20:41:10 +0200 From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> To: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org> Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, shemminger@...tta.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] IP: Increment INADDRERRORS if routing for a packet is not successful Le mercredi 02 juin 2010 à 13:01 -0500, Christoph Lameter a écrit : > On Wed, 2 Jun 2010, Eric Dumazet wrote: > > > Here is the patch I cooked to account for RP_FILTER errors in multicast > > path. > > > > I will complete it to also do the unicast part before official > > submission. > > > > Christoph, the official counter would be IPSTATS_MIB_INNOROUTES > > Great. Thanks. > > > ipSystemStatsInNoRoutes OBJECT-TYPE > > SYNTAX Counter32 > > MAX-ACCESS read-only > > STATUS current > > DESCRIPTION > > "The number of input IP datagrams discarded because no route > > could be found to transmit them to their destination. > > add "or because the rp_filter rejected the packet"? In the case of MC > traffic you dont really need a route. > Unicast trafic dont need a reverse route, if you only receive packets. rp_filter is an optional check, not covered by standard MIBS, so its borderline. > In my particular case it is a weird corner case for the rp_filter. > > Two NICs are on the same subnet. Different multicast groups are joined > on each (Using two NICs to balance the MC load since the drivers have > some multicast limitations and having different interrupt lines for each > NIC is also beneficial). > yeah, I know about this problem, and am working on it too... > The rp_filter rejects all multicast traffic to the subscriptions on the > second NIC. I guess this is because the source address of the MC traffic > (on the same subnet) is also reachable via the first NIC. > Its clearly a case were rp_filter should be set to 2, dont you think ? > So you could add also "because of breakage in the rp_filter (rp_filter > ignores the multicast subscription tables when determining the correct > reverse path of the packet)" > In standard RFC ? I wont change it :) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists